opinion
New Tool Against Cancer: GPS
“challenging People to Shape
a Better future now”
B ernie f oSter
Founder/Publisher
B oBBie d ore f oSter
executive editor
t ed B ankS
advertising Manager
J errY f oSter
account executive
l iSa l oving
news editor
H elen S ilviS
Multimedia editor
d avid k idd
graphic Designer
M onica J. f oSter
Seattle office Coordinator
J ulie k eefe
S uSan f ried
Photographers
The Skanner Newspaper, estab-
lished in October 1975, is a weekly
publication,
published
each
Wednesday by IMM Publications
Inc.,
415 N. Killingsworth St.,
P.O. Box 5455, Portland, OR
97228.
Telephone (503) 285-5555.
E-mail: info@theskan-
ner.com
World Wide Web site:
http://www.theskanner.com
Fax: (503) 285-2900
the Skanner is a member of the
National Newspaper Pub lishers
Association and West Coast Black
Pub lishers Association.
All photos submitted become the
property of the Skanner. We are not
re spon sible for lost or damaged photos
either solicited or unsolicited.
© 2011 the Skanner. ALL RIGHTS RE -
knowing What’s
important can
change Your life!
Subscribe to The Skanner –
don’t miss an issue!
Please sign me up for:
q 1 year $74
q 2 year $140
q New Subscription
q Renewal
________________________
name
_________________
address
_________________
city
_________________
State
______
ZiP
________
Phone
Mail with check or money
order to: The Skanner
P.O. Box 5455
Portland, OR 97228
T
he American Cancer Society
estimates that 29,412 men
died from prostate cancer in
2008. Unfortunately, prostate can-
cer strikes African-American
males at a higher rate than other
demographics, as well as among
those with a family history of
prostate cancer.
Concerns about the benefits of
screening blood tests called the
PSA (prostate specific antigen)
have been raised and in the news
lately. I believe, however, that
only through PSA testing can we
detect prostate cancer in its earli-
est, most curable stages. When the
PSA level is known, you and your
urologist can make an informed
decision about the need for a biop-
sy of the prostate to see if cancer is
present, and, if so, to decide if
treatment is necessary.
Studies have demonstrated that
radiation treatment – delivered
externally and internally - is as
effective in treating the disease as
surgical removal of the prostate.
Although there are side effects
associated with radiation, patients
who choose this treatment often
cite the risks of surgery – most
notably incontinence and impo-
tence. Further, because radiation
can be delivered in an outpatient
setting, most men are able to con-
tinue their normal daily activities
during treatment. However, like
all treatment regimens, radiation
delivery is not without its chal-
lenges.
One of the biggest issues doctors
g ood S aMaritan
Dr. Mark Schray
face in delivering external beam
radiation to the prostate tumor is
organ motion, a natural and con-
tinuous bodily function. Clinical
studies have documented that
organ motion is both unpredictable
and variable. Each day the prostate
may shift up to a centimeter and
during treatment, it may shift sev-
eral millimeters when a patient
exposure may often lead to side-
effects.
If a tumor can be effectively
tracked during treatment, the radi-
ation can be delivered more accu-
rately. Knowing the exact location
of the tumor, in real-time, allows
doctors to deliver radiation only to
the tumor and less of the adjacent
healthy tissue.
Nearly 100 leading medical cen-
ters worldwide, including Legacy
Good Samaritan Medical Center
in Portland have adopted a revolu-
tionary technology called the
When treating the prostate, every
millimeter matters
breathes or coughs. Although this
may seem like a small distance, it
can produce some big problems.
Unfortunately, conventional meth-
ods to locate tumors do not allow
doctors to identify the exact loca-
tion of a tumor in real-time during
radiation therapy.
Doctors take organ motion into
consideration by delivering radia-
tion to an area surrounding the
prostate, in case the tumor moves.
However, that can also result in
the unintended irradiation of
healthy tissue. If that tissue is the
urinary tract or rectum, this extra
Calypso System. This device,
which is also known as “GPS for
the Body®”, enables physicians to
determine the exact location of the
prostate in real-time during radia-
tion therapy. Armed with this
information, radiation to the sur-
rounding healthy tissue can be
reduced and side effects can be
minimized.
This technology is driven by
three electromagnetic transpon-
ders, each the size of a grain of
rice, which are permanently
implanted within the patient’s
prostate gland (the procedure is
similar to that of a biopsy). The
transponders send benign radio
waves that allow physicians to
precisely pinpoint the location of
the prostate, even if it moves dur-
ing treatment. If necessary, the
physician can pause treatment and
re-adjust the patient, thereby
avoiding potential damage to the
healthy tissue.
In May 2010, the results of a
clinical study involving this tech-
nology were published in a med-
ical journal. Researchers found
that prostate cancer patients who
were treated with radiation thera-
py and whose tumors were moni-
tored by the Calypso System
reported fewer bowel, rectal and
urinary side effects than patients
whose radiation treatments with-
out GPS for the Body.
When treating the prostate,
every millimeter matters. The
Calypso System’s ability to track
organ motion ensures that the radi-
ation beam hits its target – and
nothing else - for the duration of
treatment. My patients who have
undergone radiation accompanied
by this technology find confidence
and reassurance in knowing that
we are using cutting-edge technol-
ogy to not only eradicate their can-
cer, but to do it in such as way that
maintains their high quality-of-
life.
Dr. Mark Schray is a practicing
radiation oncologist at legacy
good Samaritan Medical Center.
For an appointment, please call
503-413-7135
Police Oversight is Back on the Agenda
T
his Wednesday, Nov. 16,
Portlanders will have a rare
and important opportunity
to ask City Council to improve
oversight and policies of the
Portland Police Bureau.
On Nov. 4, Mayor Sam Adams
and Police Chief Mike Reese
released a 44-page document (the
“Report on Recommendations
Regarding the Portland Police
Bureau”) responding to at least
four sets of recommendations to
improve the Police Bureau and the
city’s oversight system (the
Independent Police Review
Division, or IPR).
On Monday of last week,
Portland City Auditor Lavonne
Griffin Valade released her own
45-page response to most of the
same reports, as well as draft lan-
guage to change the IPR ordi-
nance, particularly parts revolving
around the 9-member Citizen
Review Committee (CRC).
Amazingly, even though there
are over 150 recommendations for
changes and improvements, the
Auditor’s proposal contains only
six changes to the ordinance, only
three of which are based on com-
munity concerns.
Portland Copwatch (PCW) ana-
lyzed of many of the Mayor, Chief
and Auditor’s responses to over
100 recommendations about
changing the police oversight sys-
tem in Portland and 51 proposals
for improving police policies.
Some of the community demands
date back to 2001 and earlier.
The Mayor and Chief claim to
agree with 35 of 51 of the policy
c oPWatcH
Dan Handelman
recommendations (69 percent),
though as with the police over-
sight issues, sometimes there are
misinterpretations or parts of the
recommendations that are not
addressed. The major theme of
disagreement which causes con-
cern is the Police Bureau’s insis-
tence that they need “flexibility”
to use various kinds of force,
plaint-handling and discipline
processes, not to supplant those
processes or relieve the Police
Bureau of the responsibility of
holding its own members account-
able.”
We believe that the civilian
oversight system was set up to
supplement the Bureau’s process-
es, not merely to increase trans-
parency and/or review Internal
Affairs investigations. People do
not trust a system where police
investigate other police, no matter
how good it might be, it is funda-
People do not trust a system where
police investigate other police, no
matter how good it might be
including multiple Taser cycles,
unleashing police dogs simultane-
ously with other force options, and
firing “beanbag”
guns from less than ten feet.
Here’s an analogy: While many
people oppose the existence of
pornography, society has agreed to
tolerate a certain amount of it, so
long as it does not involve chil-
dren. What the community is ask-
ing is that we don’t want any
police violence, but if they are
going to use it, there have to be
limits.
The City insists that the IPR and
CRC were, in the Mayor’s words,
“established in an effort to
increase the transparency and fair-
ness of the Police Bureau’s com-
Page 4 The Portland and Seattle Skanner November 16, 2011
mentally never going to gain com-
munity trust until the system is
fixed.
Regarding the “Police Oversight
Stakeholder Group,” which met
from May to September 2010
under
the
auspices
of
Commissioner Randy Leonard
(and included the Auditor, IPR
Director, and Chief), the Mayor
and Chief disagreed with 19 of 41
recommendations (46 percent) and
“agreed” with just 14 (34 percent).
The Auditor agreed with 16 of 41
of those recommendations (or 39
percent) while disagreeing with 13
(32 percent).
The public was told the IPR
would be assessed one year after it
was voted into being in 2001; that
assessment finally came in
January, 2008. Then, the commu-
nity watched as Leonard, Griffin
Valade and IPR Director Mary-
Beth Baptista made changes to the
IPR ordinance behind closed
doors that were passed in March,
2010. The Stakeholder group was
created to ensure the changes to
the CRC, and further changes to
IPR, would have community
input. To say the least, it is disap-
pointing after a four-month
process by the Stakeholder group,
10 years waiting for improve-
ments to the IPR and CRC, input
from the Albina Ministerial
Alliance Coalition for Justice and
Police Reform, multiple reports
from the CRC itself, and one year
waiting to enact the Stakeholders’
41 suggestions for change that of
150 recommendations, only six
changes are being proposed to the
IPR ordinance.
The proposals and Bureau policy
issues will be discussed at City
Council on Wednesday, Nov. 16 at
2 p.m. People of this community
who have been mistreated by the
police — and who do not partake
of the civilian oversight system
because of its weaknesses — have
a rare chance to make a difference.
PCW hopes to see a renewal of the
enthusiasm for police accountabil-
ity as was saw at Council in
March, 2010, after the death of
Aaron Campbell.
For more information, visit the
PCw website at www.portland-
copwatch.org .